Puppy Linux. Such a juvenal name (it reeks of fun!); such a mature distro!
I’m a Windows refugee, a Linux nu-bee. I began my computer experience on a Commodore 128, using Basic on the command line (and Basic and/or Assembly for programming), and soon migrated to MS-DOS (actually enjoyed 5.0). Hated 3.1, was fine with 98/XP, and despised Vista (I tossed a new computer in the dumpster because of Vista - at times I have a short fuse). My final experience was with Windows 7 (which I actually liked, but not enough to overcome my aversion to Microsoft’s predatory attitude towards their customer base, even though I believe C# to be the best programming language to date, interpreted or not. Hell, I was even satisfied with MFC 6.0, as cumbersome as the learning curve was, but by then that was obsolete in the MS world. Much as Turbo Pascal was before it. With MS, you could never stay current; you were always being subjected to obsolescence. I guess that’s what I most resent about my MS experience as it relates to software development. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for progress. But I’m also a firm believer in K.I.S.S. If it works, don’t fix it! I’ll admit, MASM was attractive at one point; even JASM. It is approaching high-level. If only it was portable...).
So, after 22 years, I finally cut the cord with Microsoft. It was not an easy thing to do. But I realized that I could do everything I could do with Windows 7 (except watching Netflix and C# development) that I could do with Ubuntu 10.10. I have a “smart t.v.”, and an Android cell-phone, so I can still access Netflix (although, don’t get me started with the Mono v.s. the C# thing - it’s just not the same. C# is actually elegant. I’ve decided that C/C++/Free-Pascal and/or Python/Bash to be a much better alternative in the Linux world - my personal opinion, of course). But Ubuntu felt sluggish and bloated, just what I despised in MS. And then came Ubuntu 11.04. Unity. I don’t blame Ubuntu for moving towards the touch-screen market. After all, if you prefer a more traditional desktop, there’s always Xbuntu (which I don’t particularly care for, or Lubuntu, which is my choice of Ubuntu flavors). I used Ubuntu for about a year, and dabbled with Puppy 4.3 in the interim. I was impressed with Puppy’s flexibility, compactness, and speed. But I was put off by the rough edges. And then, after Unity, I came across Lupu 5.28. And I’ve finally found the distro I’ve been looking for (although I have to give Wary an honorable mention).
I’ve tried Slitaz, TinyCore, Arch, Mint, but none of them are as reliable/flexible and out-of-the-box ready as Puppy Linux (again, my personal opinion). I’m not a fan of JWM (or Open Box, although IceWM is ok - just ok). I actually prefer Xfce4 on Puppy; it allows for saving icons to the desktop, customization of menus, and a few eye-candy things that are not too over the top that make Puppy that more enjoyable to me. Of course, everyone has their preferences. And that’s what makes Linux so great. You have a choice of window/desktop managers (or to not have). I know it’s ironic that I don’t care for Xbuntu, but that I prefer Xfce4 on Puppy, but you know, that’s the way the chips fell. It’s just a totally different environment on Puppy than on Xbuntu.
In conclusion, I have a much customized disto that supports desktop icons, has the applications that I desire, runs in RAM if I choose (or a full install, or just plain frugal), that I can run from the hard drive, a CD, or a flash drive/stick, under 2 megs, that’s free, is reliable, and that I can compile GNU software and install easily as a PET/SFS. I can even re-master it as I see fit. I have no complaints as of yet. A little more tinkering than most, but you get what you pay for. Seriously, this is as good as it gets. If I trash my OS, I can easily replace it. Gone are the days where I have to search for a manufacturers’ CD (and with a dedicated MS distributor, that may or may not have shipped with the computer). This is truly a wonderful incarnation, and Barry should be revered.
Today, I use Puppy exclusively. And I am more than thankful for its’ existence. Thank you to Barry and to all that have helped make this such a wonderful, stable, vibrant distribution. Puppy Linux is truly a gem that can be held high as an example of success when it comes to the discussion of quality, open source applications. My only hope is that one day I can contribute something meaningful to the Puppy community.
As a Windows refugee, I have some thoughts on future Puppy development. First off, I’ve been a “troll” on this forum for over a year. A guest. Today I decided to register. Secondly, I’ve read many reviews of Puppy Linux on various online publications, and have come to the conclusion that, although I enjoy being “root” by default, it may be advantageous to develop future puppy’s with the ability to have multiple-users and ‘sudo’. This would remove one of the largest complaints that I’ve witness while reading reviews. The second suggestion (and keep in mind, this is just an opinion, not necessarily a demand), as an ex-Windows refugee, is to make it more palatable to desktop users. Puppy is moving towards being a more modern distro (ala-lupu-5.2. Ditch JWM in favor of a window manager that supports saving icons/launchers to the desktop. I’m all in favor of smaller operating systems, and specialized Puppies can always be released for this purpose, but for the general publics’s sake, if you make puppy a bit more familiar to Windows users, you could certainly increase your market share and Distro Watch ratings. And attract new Linux users. And those that are tired of Ubuntu. Because a lot of them despise Unity. Give them what they want in a light-weight distro, and Puppy will remain a worthy gem.Last edited by elroy on Thu 02 Feb 2012, 17:40; edited 1 time in total

If Puppy ( or any distro. ) were based on a Squash file package system
adding and removing apps. becomes seamless, not a file tracking mess.

Start a fresh install of Puppy, click for a web browser and it asks to install
your choice, good except it takes up Save file space, not good...

If browsers, window managers, and other apps. were easy to add and remove,
then trying out "other stuff" would not be such a messy crap shoot.

I`ve tried so many .pet packages that didn`t work I won`t install them now.

Squash files stay compressed, don`t scatter files, and can run in ram easily.

# What elroy seems to be saying in part is "individuality" in O.S. setup.
Everyone likes different stuff, and a good package setup is critical.
And the packages must be built on the target O.S. by competent people.

@sunburnt - amen to that (but bolting on stuff can be a learning experience if things don't go all seriously spangenhacky ). Gosh, clicking on a dotpet used to be such easy magical fun and then I started tearing them apart by habit at some point in time

@elroy
Nice first post here (and welcome!), many happy returns and all that. If you like to test and/or contribute, the Saluki project may appeal (xfce4 is the invested wm/de so.. .. not to mention a terrific lead who's already done some meaningful work advancing things

As a Windows refugee, I have some thoughts on future Puppy development. First off, I’ve been a “troll” on this forum for over a year. A guest. Today I decided to register. Secondly, I’ve read many reviews of Puppy Linux on various online publications, and have come to the conclusion that, although I enjoy being “root” by default, it may be advantageous to develop future puppy’s with the ability to have multiple-users and ‘sudo’. This would remove one of the largest complaints that I’ve witness while reading reviews. The second suggestion (and keep in mind, this is just an opinion, not necessarily a demand), as an ex-Windows refugee, is to make it more palatable to desktop users. Puppy is moving towards being a more modern distro (ala-lupu-5.2. Ditch JWM in favor of a window manager that supports saving icons/launchers to the desktop. I’m all in favor of smaller operating systems, and specialized Puppies can always be released for this purpose, but for the general publics’s sake, if you make puppy a bit more familiar to Windows users, you could certainly increase your market share and Distro Watch ratings. And attract new Linux users. And those that are tired of Ubuntu. Because a lot of them despise Unity. Give them what they want in a light-weight distro, and Puppy will remain a worthy gem.

I think you probably mean "lurker", troll is something else.

Would you like to help test/develop saluki? It's an Xfce puplet with pretty much the same goals you stated - except the run as root thing - I'm not going to change that.

elroy, you are in good company liking xfce.
Linus Torvalds from which/whom Linux kernel
has it's name have that as first choice as I get his text.

Quote:

http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=73687
Saluki is a woof-build based on Racy with Xfce. The suggested target hardware is computers less than 5 years old. It should run tolerably fast on netbooks and such, but it does need a bit more cpu than the standard ROX/Jwm puppy.

Jemimah as main Developer and many others take part
in testing of Saluki Puppy so you can help out by reporting
what happens when you test that one.

Quote:

I’ve read many reviews of Puppy Linux on various online
publications, and have come to the conclusion that,
although I enjoy being “root” by default,

it may be advantageous to develop future puppy’s with the
ability to have multiple-users and ‘sudo’. This would remove
one of the largest complaints that I’ve witness while reading
reviews

Yes we all know this. Seems the only solution to this
is to make a kind of fork of Puppy and name it something
else.

Barry Kauler the owner of Puppy Linux as a distro
seems to like being root so it is a made deal from scratch.

He wants it that way and you have to get savvy enough
to make your own fork if you want a standard linux
out of puppy.

That could be a good thing. You are motivated and that
is the best start one can have. The journey is the fun
of it. Sure there will be set backs and hurdles but in the
end you will have accomplished something grand.

A Puppy fork that none can write a review that say
that being root is bad because you solved that root thing

I wish you all luck accomplish it. I am too computer
challenged to be able to do it. I am even logically challenged. Nooby is rather confused in his thinking even._________________I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

If Puppy ( or any distro. ) were based on a Squash file package system
adding and removing apps. becomes seamless, not a file tracking mess.

I totally agree, sunburnt. I rely mainly on SFS files rather than pets.
The pet system results in all sorts of unexpected consequences._________________Classic Opera 12.16 browser SFS package for Precise, Slacko, Racy, Wary, Lucid, etc available here

So could one make a very small Puppy then that is
multi user and that let one chose sfs for almost
everything? Loading on the fly and unloading as
easily and so on.

What would be needed to start from scratch and still be
compatible with the sfs? I wild guess that one would not
be compatible with the pets without being a real puppy
but could one be compatible with all the SFS and that
way be a kind of multi user fork of Puppy?_________________I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

Thank you for the warm reception...much appreciated. And the wonderful ideas. I'm on my way to check out Saluki.

As I stated in my initial post, I prefer being 'root'. I'm the only user on my laptop, and it's much more convenient in that respect to not have to type 'sudu' or 'su' when entering terminal commands. I only offered it up because it seems to be such a common theme, and one of the few complaints, that I observed when reading Puppy reviews.

In all seriousness, I never expected the response that my first post received. You are all very welcoming, and that gives me great comfort. Thank you for your hospitality!

Terryphi; The usual consequence is that you end up deleting your Save file.
This smacks of poor system design... As old as Puppy is, it should be fixed.

nooby; What you`re describing is Tiny Core Linux ( 10.5mb ). But not exactly.
It`s Squash files are grouped packages of files that support the app. files.
They`re not complete Squash package apps., SFS files are closer to that.

Originally I tried to get Puppy to work like this, but too much complexity.
It took me 1 week to get a modified Tiny Core working because it`s closer.

The "base" O.S. needs an editor, virtual term., file browser, and setup GUIs.
Any of the stripped Puppies would do, it`s the Squash packages that matter.

I made a static SFS of Skype years ago, it may still work with todays Puppies.
Realistically apps. must be made for each Puppy version to work properly.
With a good build script that should not be hard, except for the big apps.

As I stated in my initial post, I prefer being 'root'. I'm the only user on my laptop, and it's much more convenient in that respect to not have to type 'sudu' or 'su' when entering terminal commands. I only offered it up because it seems to be such a common theme, and one of the few complaints, that I observed when reading Puppy reviews.

I do not know saluki, but i am sure, it is a wonderful puppy.

But maybe take a try at LazY Puppy. It is lucid based, you run as root and it has 10 preconfigured and especially for LazY Puppy modified sfs files with many applications (Audio, Video, Graphics, Office etc.) There is a special Wine sfs that gives you possibility to use Windows PortableApps. There is also a .tar.gz file that contains PortableApps including some applications.

If to run as root is you main thing, and want to use sfs files mainly (sfs is the way!) you should give it a try. _________________LazY PuppyRSH's DNASARA B.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum